Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Does anyone know if there are rules against ICO purchases with most firms? I was an SA this summer and want to buy into the Kik ICO but I want to make sure this isn't something most firms have rules against. I don't see anything in the insider trading guidelines.

I doubt there's anything wrong with participating but they might question your decision making abilities for investing in a made-up, untested magic internet currency at a $1.25 billion starting valuation.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

The makers of bitcoin didn't sell 10% of the tokens for $125 million in an obvious money grab before they proved any value. Also survivorship bias. Do some research on the 1000 cryptocurrencies that are now worthless.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Yeah, the people who got in early on the Dutch tulip craze made out pretty well too.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Yeah, the people who got in early on the Dutch tulip craze made out pretty well too.

As did the people who got in early on internet search, domain names, social media, mobile apps, gold, big city real estate and Picasso paintings.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Yeah, the people who got in early on the Dutch tulip craze made out pretty well too.

As did the people who got in early on internet search, domain names, social media, mobile apps, gold, big city real estate and Picasso paintings.

Not sure why you're obsessed with Tulips though

The Dutch tulip craze was one of the first recorded speculative bubbles. It's a pretty common reference point when talking asset bubbles.

It may very well be that cryptocurrencies do become the "internet" of currency, but that doesn't mean you can't be very badly burned in the early days. The internet was indeed revolutionary for business, but a lot of money was lost in the .com bust of the late 90s/early 00's by people who were irrationally exuberant about what the internet could do for commerce. Pets.com investors were early internet investors, but they lost everything they put into it. The bottom line is that the very high volatility in the crypto market place, and meteoric rise in value is not the sign of a healthy marketplace- it is the sign of a speculative bubble. The defensiveness people exhibit when cryptocurrencies are criticized is also a bright flashing warning sign. True believers tend not to be rational investors.

It's also worth noting that there have already been some ICOs that were later found to be straight-up scams. The ICO market is currently in the wild west stage- caveat emptor.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Yeah, the people who got in early on the Dutch tulip craze made out pretty well too.

As did the people who got in early on internet search, domain names, social media, mobile apps, gold, big city real estate and Picasso paintings.

Not sure why you're obsessed with Tulips though

The Dutch tulip craze was one of the first recorded speculative bubbles. It's a pretty common reference point when talking asset bubbles.

It may very well be that cryptocurrencies do become the "internet" of currency, but that doesn't mean you can't be very badly burned in the early days. The internet was indeed revolutionary for business, but a lot of money was lost in the .com bust of the late 90s/early 00's by people who were irrationally exuberant about what the internet could do for commerce. Pets.com investors were early internet investors, but they lost everything they put into it. The bottom line is that the very high volatility in the crypto market place, and meteoric rise in value is not the sign of a healthy marketplace- it is the sign of a speculative bubble. The defensiveness people exhibit when cryptocurrencies are criticized is also a bright flashing warning sign. True believers tend not to be rational investors.

It's also worth noting that there have already been some ICOs that were later found to be straight-up scams. The ICO market is currently in the wild west stage- caveat emptor.

But that doesn't mean investments into ICO's, and Kik in particular, can't be part of a well-thought-out investment portfolio. It is a typical thing to do, actually.

Kin is separate from the valuation of kik. It is a cryptocurrency that kik will have a stake in. Otherwise from what I understand it is similar to btc , litecoin, etc. We all know how terribly it worked out for people who bought btc in the beginning and held on to it till now...lol.

Yeah, the people who got in early on the Dutch tulip craze made out pretty well too.

As did the people who got in early on internet search, domain names, social media, mobile apps, gold, big city real estate and Picasso paintings.

Not sure why you're obsessed with Tulips though

The Dutch tulip craze was one of the first recorded speculative bubbles. It's a pretty common reference point when talking asset bubbles.

It may very well be that cryptocurrencies do become the "internet" of currency, but that doesn't mean you can't be very badly burned in the early days. The internet was indeed revolutionary for business, but a lot of money was lost in the .com bust of the late 90s/early 00's by people who were irrationally exuberant about what the internet could do for commerce. Pets.com investors were early internet investors, but they lost everything they put into it. The bottom line is that the very high volatility in the crypto market place, and meteoric rise in value is not the sign of a healthy marketplace- it is the sign of a speculative bubble. The defensiveness people exhibit when cryptocurrencies are criticized is also a bright flashing warning sign. True believers tend not to be rational investors.

It's also worth noting that there have already been some ICOs that were later found to be straight-up scams. The ICO market is currently in the wild west stage- caveat emptor.

I'm well aware of the tulip analogy - it's been used as nauseum against crypto assets over the last 8 years, even as those same crypto assets have outperformed every other asset class 7 of the past 8 years.

And meteoric rise/volatility can either be a speculative bubble or the rapid creation of new value (what would Uber's chart look like if it was publicly traded from day one?). But you make great points about diversification and the importance of being cautious, as there are a lot of scams/worthless projects in the field.

I bought $40 worth a few months ago when it was added to coinbase, and now it is worth $90. Not sure if LTC has any particular features that will give it staying power in the cryptomarket, but for now it still seems to be growing steadily. I have had the highest yield on ETH, which I started investing in around the same time. I don't have enough money to be able to aggressively invest in anything, but I have made a few hundred bucks in the last 4-5 mos. from cryptocurrencies; I keep adding in a little extra money when I see prices are in a temporary slump, but not sure how long before I cash out... All the analysis I've read suggests that growth will continue over the next few years at least, but I am still afraid of getting too deeply invested.

I bought about $1000 worth of BTC in 2011-12 when 1 BTC = $10-25 (today, 1 BTC = $4240). I was in undergrad at the time, and spent it all on bullshit. If I'd held on to it until now, I'd be freaking loaded (at least by my standards). Still kick myself everyday...

It seems that very few people are actually reporting cryptocurrency income.

According to Fortune, the last few years less than a thousand people per year have reported profits or loses related to cryptocurrency. So I suspect that this has not been common enough (yet) for many firms to have though much reason to spend time on it.